Monash Bioethics Review

, Volume 32, Issue 3–4, pp 172–188 | Cite as

Public goods and procreation

  • Jonathan Anomaly
Original Article


Procreation is the ultimate public goods problem. Each new child affects the welfare of many other people, and some (but not all) children produce uncompensated value that future people will enjoy. This essay addresses challenges that arise if we think of procreation and parenting as public goods. These include whether individual choices are likely to lead to a socially desirable outcome, and whether changes in laws, social norms, or access to genetic engineering and embryo selection might improve the aggregate outcome of our reproductive choices.


Public goods Procreation Reproductive rights Genetic enhancement Eugenics 



Thanks to Allen Buchanan, Ben Dreyzen, Iskra Fileva, Geoff Childers, Michael Huemer, John McMillan, and Julian Savulescu for comments and conversations about these ideas.


  1. Anomaly, J. 2015. Public goods and government action. Politics, Philosophy, and Economics. doi: 10.1177/1470594X13505414.Google Scholar
  2. Archard, D. 2004. Wrongful life. Philosophy 79(3): 403–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Archard, D., and D. Benatar. 2010. The limits of reproductive freedom. In Procreation and parenthood, eds. D. Archard and D. Benatar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Becker, G. 1960. An economic analysis of fertility. In Demographic and economic change in developed countries. Princeton: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  5. Bezdjian, S., L. Baker, and C. Tuvblad. 2012. Genetic and environmental influences on impulsivity: A meta-analysis of twin, family, and adoption studies. Clinical Psychology Review 31(7): 1209–1223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bjorkland, A. 2006. Does family policy affect fertility? Lessons from Sweden. Journal of Population Economics 19: 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brock, D. 2005. Shaping future children: Parental rights and societal interests. Journal of Political Philosophy 13(4): 377–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buchanan, A. 2007. Institutions, beliefs and ethics: Eugenics as a case study. The Journal of Political Philosophy 15(1): 22–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buchanan, A. 2011. Beyond humanity?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buchanan, A., D. Brock, N. Daniels, and D. Wikler. 2000. From chance to choice: Genetics and justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Casal, P. 1999. Environmentalism, procreation and the principle of fairness. Public Affairs Quarterly 14(4): 363–376.Google Scholar
  12. Cochran, G., and H. Harpending. 2010. The 10,000 year explosion: How civilization accelerated human evolution. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  13. Cochran, G., J. Hardin, and H. Harpending. 2006. Natural history of Ashkenazi intelligence. Journal of Biosocial Science 38(5): 659–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Darwin, C. 1871. The descent of man. Reprinted in 2004. New York: Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
  15. deGrazia, D. 2012. Creation ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dillard, C. 2007. Rethinking the procreative right. Yale Human Rights and Development Law Journal 10: 1–63.Google Scholar
  17. Douglas, T., and K. Devolder. 2013. Procreative altruism. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38: 400–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Feinberg, J. 1980. The rights of animals and unborn generations. In Rights, justice and the bounds of liberty. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Folbre, N. 1994. Children as public goods. American Economic Review 84(2): 86–90.Google Scholar
  20. Galton, F. 1904. Eugenics: Its definition, scope, and aims. The American Journal of Sociology 10(1): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hamilton, W. 2000. A review of dysgenics: Genetic deterioration in modern populations. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics 64: 363–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Herbst, C., and J. Ifcher. draft. A bundle of joy: Does parenting really make us miserable? Google Scholar
  23. Holtug, N. 2002. The harm principle. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5: 357–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hotz, J., J. Klerman, and R. Willis. 1997. The economics of fertility in developed countries. In The handbook of population and family economics, eds. Mark Rosenzweig and Oded Stark. Amsterdam: North Holland Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hymowitz, K. 2013. Knot yet: The benefits and costs of delayed marriage in America. National Marriage Project: University of Virginia. Accessed 1 Oct 2014.
  26. LaFollette, H. 1980. Licensing parents. Philosophy and Public Affairs 9(2): 182–197.Google Scholar
  27. LaFollette, H. 2010. Licensing parents revisited. Journal of Applied Philosophy 27(4): 327–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lewis, J.E., et al. 2011. The mismeasure of science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on skulls and bias. PLoS Biology 9(6). doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071.
  29. Lynn, R. 2001. Eugenics: A reassessment. London: Praeger Press.Google Scholar
  30. Lynn, R. 2011. The chosen people: A study of Jewish intelligence and achievement. Whitefish: Washington Summit Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. Mackintosh, N. 2011. IQ and human intelligence, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Magnus, G. 2008. The age of ageing. New York: Wiley Publishing.Google Scholar
  33. Meisenberg, G. 2009. Wealth, intelligence, politics and global fertility differentials. Journal of Biosocial Science 41(4): 519–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meisenberg, G. 2010. The reproduction of intelligence. Intelligence 38: 220–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Parfit, D. 1984. Reasons and persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Powell, R., and A. Buchanan. 2011. Breaking evolution’s chains. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36(1): 6–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rawls, J. 1971. A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Retherford, R., and W. Sewell. 1989. How intelligence affects fertility. Intelligence 13: 169–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ridley, M. 2010. The rational optimist: How prosperity evolves. London: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  40. Savulescu, J., and G. Kahane. 2009. The moral obligation to create children with the best chance of the best life. Bioethics 23(5): 274–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Savulescu, J., and I. Persson. 2014. Unfit for the future: The need for moral enhancement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Savulescu, J., A. Sandberg, and G. Kahane. 2011. Well-being and enhancement. In Enhancing human capacities, ed. Julian Savulescu, Ruud ter Meulen, and Guy Kahane. New York: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schelling, T. 2006. Micromotives and macrobehavior. New York: WW Norton and Co.Google Scholar
  44. Shanner, L. 1995. The right to procreate: When rights claims have gone wrong. McGill Law Journal 40: 823–874.Google Scholar
  45. Shaw, G.B. 1903. Man and superman: A comedy and a philosophy. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  46. Smilansky, S. 2005. Is there a moral obligation to have children? Journal of Applied Philosophy 12(1): 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smith, J.M. 1965. Eugenics and utopia. Daedalus 94: 487–505.Google Scholar
  48. Smith, A. 1776. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Accessed 1 Oct 2014.
  49. Sun, S. 2011. Population policy and reproduction in Singapore. London: Routledge Publishing.Google Scholar
  50. Teasdale, T., and D. Ownen. 2008. Secular declines in cognitive test scores: A reversal of the Flynn Effect. Intelligence 36: 121–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wade, N. 2014. A troublesome inheritance: Genes, race, and human history. New York: Penguin Publishing.Google Scholar
  52. Walsh, A., and J. Bolen. 2012. The neurobiology of criminal behavior: Gene–brain–culture interaction. London: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Monash University 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, Politics, and EconomicsDuke UniversityDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations